Author
Topic: VW Diesel Deception (Read 34534 times)

Whilst I understand all the angst over the fraud on the software of the pollution device, I don't understand why you would give back what was a really good vehicle rather than just take the compensation. Then again I don't understand the vehicle herd mentality that some in the USA have.

Garry, not certain what you mean by the pejorative "herd mentality" that some have in the USA, but in reality, the situation was merely a blip, a speedbump in overall VW sales in the USA, with the bulk of that in 2016. http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/volkswagen/

Diesels in the USA have always been just a small fraction of overall motorcar sales. There are a variety of reasons for this, such as [generally significant] increase in initial cost, and wildly fluctuating disparity in fuel pricing. Anecdotally around here (Michigan), diesel has always been higher, and that high fuel price negates the other savings. Today, one local retailer is at USD $3.07 for regular (87 octane) and $3.29 for diesel. I've seen that differential as high as $0.40 per gallon, particularly during a cold or potentially cold winter when home heating oil (used extensively in the north east) prices go up. Home heating oil is basically #2 diesel. Due to fuel pricing and taxes the payback on a diesel in Europe is significantly quicker than the USA; that won't change easily, and thus the mix of diesel/gas won't either. With hybrids and electrics all the rage, I'm not sure diesel will make a comeback for passenger cars in the USA.

I cannot speak for the population that had these [deceptive] TDIs but presumably some bought them because [amongst many reasons) they thought they were being "greener" than other choices, thus when the scandal emerged the only sensible thing to do was to get rid of it. I'm sure there's a subset there that simply loved diesels (to heck with emissions) and took the money. Others didn't want to be "caught" down the road with a car that they might not be able to sell.

As an interesting analogy, in the early 1990s many new homes in the USA were sided with "LP Inner Seal" OSB siding, which was basically an inferior product that was cheap. It failed miserably, and there was a huge class action lawsuit to recover damages. There were a lot of homes in my neighborhood with that junk on it; some owners took the money and did nothing. Others took a settlement and re-sided their homes. Those that took the money and did nothing found themselves in a bit of a bind when they went to sell their homes; they basically had to give back what they thought was a windfall from years earlier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana-Pacific In the worst cases, the cost to re-side had gone up and savvy buyers required the sellers to make the change prior to closing.

So is "not wanting to own a product not living up to specifications" and one that will probably be difficult to sell down the line, a uniquely American trait? I wouldn't think so, sounds like human nature to me!

My understanding of the Deiselgate as it is known in the USA was that when the vehicle was put on the test rig for assessing if it met the polution standards in CA it went into a secret mode that changed the settings such that it gave the appearance of being less poluting than reality.

Whilst that is a classic case of fraud and a massive deception for an large international company to do on the general public, only the USA had the big recall of the cars, compensation and the general air of “the world was about to fall in”, the rest of the world just acknowledged that there was fraud, sure lets charge the guilty players with that and now lets move on. They were great cars, in the rest of the world they are not doing a masive recall, remember it was only in the test mode that the change is made to the running system they didnt need to do what they did to gain acceptancce. The vehicle actually runs ‘better’ with more power (and with more polution) in its normal running mode. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the vehicles and in AUstralia and I believe the rest of the world, the residual values of the vehicles is no different, they still all work just fine.

Herd mentality or maybe a nicer way to put it, a US class actions in Dieselgate killed the residual values in USA only whereas most of the world yawned and moved on.,

There was a lot wrong with the cars, namely that they polluted way beyond the maximum acceptable norms. The rest of the world has been asleep at the wheel and apparently cares more about 'money now' and 'let's not upset the Big Car Makers and their Unions' than in the US. Had it been a US car maker with large sales in Europe, probably the tables would have been turned, anyway. I for one fault VW big time and hats off to the small-time researchers at this university that blew the lid off of this scam.

There are other firms, and executives who have yet to be fully explored in this. Daimler has been summoned by GERMAN authorities over this issue too: that is, defeat devices or software.

Yes we take our emissions very seriously here in the USA, perhaps being the world's leader in doing so...and the CARB is more so than anyone else. (CARB=California Air Resources Board). Like it or not, they are the primary reason why we can actually see in Los Angeles in the 21st century.

Other countries (like the EU) take other things seriously. When I travelled to Sicily last year, our tour guide told us that there are no more wood-fired commercial pizzerias in Sicily, something about EU pollution regulations (as if...). A year after all the "Pagoda Style" books were sold, the Mercedes-Benz Classic Center came back to me with a form to fill out about the WEIGHT of the POLYETHYLENE FILM on books! Yes, this shrink wrap apparently is something that Germany considers pollution, non-green, and thus a tax must be paid on it. Oh, it was like 1.5 grams of PE per book. Probably cost MB more to fill out the form than the tax they had to pay. You can pry my local coal and wood-fired pizza joints away from my cold dead hands, wrapped in PE.

Garry, the TDI cars were NOT fine. They were massive polluters. How each country deals with it, is up to them. As I pointed out despite this massive fraud, it had little impact on VW in the USA. A forgiving public. Somehow, VW (according to Wallace) has managed a viable fix; had they done this in the first place instead of cheating, they'd have saved themselves a lot of grief.

When I travelled to Sicily last year, our tour guide told us that there are no more wood-fired commercial pizzerias in Sicily, something about EU pollution regulations (as if...).

I think the Italians are doing away with the wood fired pizzerias even less quickly than they are doing away with their diesel engine cars (57% Diesel and holding steady). I Googled, "pizzeria con forno a legna palermo," and found at least 20 in the Sicilian capital!

A forgiving public. Somehow, VW (according to Wallace) has managed a viable fix; had they done this in the first place instead of cheating, they'd have saved themselves a lot of grief.

Not sure about forgiving, but forgetful for sure. And why merged corporations change their names slowly. “I know Nissan, but what’s a Datsun”? TDI? What’s that?

I do not know what the exact fix is, but there were several options with cost being the driver. The TDI was a marketing move to produce a cheaper diesel. Their initial plans didn’t work and it should have stopped there. Cut the investment losses and move on knowing that a cheap diesel would not pass modern emissions. It was a gamble that cost them dearly.

I think the Italians are doing away with the wood fired pizzerias even less quickly than they are doing away with their diesel engine cars (57% Diesel and holding steady). I Googled, "pizzeria con forno a legna palermo," and found at least 20 in the Sicilian capital!

Laughing now Ralph...just because they say "pizzeria con forno a legna palermo" doesn't mean they actually are. It's Sicily you know. I was caught unaware, for example, that the "VISA Mastercard" signs in the windows of restaurants and shops actually meant something. Was only able to use credit cards at high-end hotel, etc. For some reason at the little shops and restaurants, the machines was always down, the internet not working, or [fill in the blank] on excuse. This wouldn't have been so bad but there are no exchanges left on the island save for the airports and one in Taormina. The diesel acceptance is all about taxes and government involvement and thus will probably stay that way for a while.

TDI = Turbo Direct Injection. These days this acronym can be applied to either a Gasoline or Diesel fueled engine. Such acronyms are rife in the auto industry. My favorite one was CVCC, which was the acronym applied to the three valve (two intake, one exhaust) engine that was introduced in the first Honda Civic back in 1975. Everybody thought it was just a fancy way of saying it was the engine that came in a Civic. CVCC actually stood for Compound Vortex Combustion Chamber. These engines burned cleanly enough that they didn't need catalytic converters to pass even the California emissions standards in effect at the time.

Was only able to use credit cards at high-end hotel, etc. For some reason at the little shops and restaurants, the machines was always down, the internet not working, or [fill in the blank] on excuse.

Off the tourist track credit card use is very low. A couple of the main reasons for this: The merchant doesn’t want to pay the card company fee especially for small transactions. Also, when a card is used, there is an electronic record created so the merchant must also give you a matching official receipt from his cash register. This reduces to zero the opportunity for negotiated cash transactions where IVA (value added tax) is not paid. As the IVA rate is 22%, the merchant and the customer make out. The government is the big loser (and obviously the country as a whole).

Even though I owned one, I didn't actually even know what TDI stood for. I figured the D was for diesel and then whatever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbocharged_direct_injection And yes, I had no idea about the CVCC and thought it was Civic. How about the W123 diesel wagon "300 TD"? Turbo diesel? Nope. Yes it was a turbo diesel but the "T" was the configuration for a wagon.

Thanks so much Wallace, for posting this. So, unless the Feds approved a fix that was somewhat more lenient than would have been approved during initial testing, the fix seemed relatively easy, and the reduction in performance and mileage was for intents, insignificant. Which really begs the question, "What the *&^% were they thinking?" Couldn't or shouldn't they have done this up front?

So, unless the Feds approved a fix that was somewhat more lenient than would have been approved during initial testing, the fix seemed relatively easy, and the reduction in performance and mileage was for intents, insignificant. Which really begs the question, "What the *&^% were they thinking?" Couldn't or shouldn't they have done this up front?

Maybe we should check the Fed's bank accounts for a large, unexpected deposit? I am a little surprised myself by the relative ease of repair and the very little effect on performance. Knowing this, I probably would have kept mine. They did mention a "new" Nitrogen Oxide Catalyst and not sure if this is the Gold Standard that wasn't available before?

Off the tourist track credit card use is very low. A couple of the main reasons for this: The merchant doesn’t want to pay the card company fee especially for small transactions. Also, when a card is used, there is an electronic record created so the merchant must also give you a matching official receipt from his cash register. This reduces to zero the opportunity for negotiated cash transactions where IVA (value added tax) is not paid. As the IVA rate is 22%, the merchant and the customer make out. The government is the big loser (and obviously the country as a whole).

My sister went to Greece a few years ago and everything was cash, and by that I mean everything. Little wonder the country was nearly bankrupt.

Garry, not certain what you mean by the pejorative "herd mentality" that some have in the USA, but in reality, the situation was merely a blip, a speedbump in overall VW sales in the USA, with the bulk of that in 2016. http://carsalesbase.com/us-car-sales-data/volkswagen/

Diesels in the USA have always been just a small fraction of overall motorcar sales. There are a variety of reasons for this, such as [generally significant] increase in initial cost, and wildly fluctuating disparity in fuel pricing. Anecdotally around here (Michigan), diesel has always been higher, and that high fuel price negates the other savings. Today, one local retailer is at USD $3.07 for regular (87 octane) and $3.29 for diesel. I've seen that differential as high as $0.40 per gallon, particularly during a cold or potentially cold winter when home heating oil (used extensively in the north east) prices go up. Home heating oil is basically #2 diesel. Due to fuel pricing and taxes the payback on a diesel in Europe is significantly quicker than the USA; that won't change easily, and thus the mix of diesel/gas won't either. With hybrids and electrics all the rage, I'm not sure diesel will make a comeback for passenger cars in the USA.

I cannot speak for the population that had these [deceptive] TDIs but presumably some bought them because [amongst many reasons) they thought they were being "greener" than other choices, thus when the scandal emerged the only sensible thing to do was to get rid of it. I'm sure there's a subset there that simply loved diesels (to heck with emissions) and took the money. Others didn't want to be "caught" down the road with a car that they might not be able to sell.

As an interesting analogy, in the early 1990s many new homes in the USA were sided with "LP Inner Seal" OSB siding, which was basically an inferior product that was cheap. It failed miserably, and there was a huge class action lawsuit to recover damages. There were a lot of homes in my neighborhood with that junk on it; some owners took the money and did nothing. Others took a settlement and re-sided their homes. Those that took the money and did nothing found themselves in a bit of a bind when they went to sell their homes; they basically had to give back what they thought was a windfall from years earlier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana-Pacific In the worst cases, the cost to re-side had gone up and savvy buyers required the sellers to make the change prior to closing.

So is "not wanting to own a product not living up to specifications" and one that will probably be difficult to sell down the line, a uniquely American trait? I wouldn't think so, sounds like human nature to me!

Houses aren't like cars. You are stuck with your location and if you happen to build on top of the Love Canal you might be out on the street. Can't be compared and shouldn't be.

Which is why cars can be a good investment if you buy the right one. You can always take your car to the right market - not so much with a house.

Responding to a post made on June 11? You been on vacation or something?My post TODAY was a tongue in cheek about someone who took the money from VW, and bought a BMW to replace it...and decided to tell the world.